Question about Panasonic Lumix G Vario 100-300mm F4-5.6 OIS

Just bought my OM-D today, and am considering which lenses to add on. I currently only have the kit 12-50mm 3.5-6.3

My plan at the moment is to buy in the following order (when I have the cash)

1. Panasonic 35-100mm 2.8 - for longer shots and bright lens.

2. Panasonic 12-35mm 2.8 - brighter than the kit lens (but with rumours of an upcoming Olympus zoom with similar FL range I'm happy to hold off on this a while)

3. Panasonic 100-300mm 4.0-5.6 - all reviews and opinions indicate it's the best long lens. I also saw a second hand lens at a good price today.

But I'm a little unsure of the 100-300mm and wondering whether I should wait on this too, mainly because the lens is getting on for 3 years old so I wonder if there a strong likelihood of a new lens being released to supercede this, either a brighter lens to complete a Panasonic f2.8 trio, or maybe a comparable Olympus?

Just bought my OM-D today, and am considering which lenses to add on. I currently only have the kit 12-50mm 3.5-6.3

My plan at the moment is to buy in the following order (when I have the cash)

1. Panasonic 35-100mm 2.8 - for longer shots and bright lens.

2. Panasonic 12-35mm 2.8 - brighter than the kit lens (but with rumours of an upcoming Olympus zoom with similar FL range I'm happy to hold off on this a while)

3. Panasonic 100-300mm 4.0-5.6 - all reviews and opinions indicate it's the best long lens. I also saw a second hand lens at a good price today.

But I'm a little unsure of the 100-300mm and wondering whether I should wait on this too, mainly because the lens is getting on for 3 years old so I wonder if there a strong likelihood of a new lens being released to supercede this, either a brighter lens to complete a Panasonic f2.8 trio, or maybe a comparable Olympus?

Further to this, would a 100-300mm f2.8 lens be:

a) possible to make or

b) prohibitively heavy/large/expensive anyway?

Thanks for your opinions.

A faster aperture version would be larger and heavier. A constant f4 version might not be too much larger, but f2.8 would be quite a beast.

There are not many choices in the native lens line up for exotic super telephoto. If you want a lot of reach you might want to consider using Canon, Nikon, et al lenses via an adapter. That will be manual focus and aperture only mind.

A faster aperture version would be larger and heavier. A constant f4 version might not be too much larger, but f2.8 would be quite a beast.

There are not many choices in the native lens line up for exotic super telephoto. If you want a lot of reach you might want to consider using Canon, Nikon, et al lenses via an adapter. That will be manual focus and aperture only mind.

Yes, I imagined size/weight might be an issue. And I'll compare reviews of those alternative lenses too.

I saw the Panasonic 45-150, 45-175 and 45-200 at the shop today - definitely need to research the differences other than their FL.

I'd considered an adapter and DSLR lenses, but the main reason I've just bought into M4/3 is to reduce size/weight so I'd be contradicting myself a little. But if adapters are cheap, I'll dig out my old FD Canon lenses and test them at a shop, see how they feel.

I'm on my second trip through m43 land and Panasonic cameras and lenses. Before, I had the 45-175mm and the 100-300mm. I really liked both lenses.

This time I hoped to get away with a 45-150mm for my zoom work. It's a really, really good lens and has the compact M43 "look" that I like. It is basically my every day lens on a G5. However, just around the yard and locally, I felt zoom restricted and knew I would want something longer for Teton/Yellowstone and even kids' baseball. I ordered the 100-300mm and it will be here tomorrow. I like the lens stabilization in zoom lenses. Not sure how the IBIS looks through the EVF, but the view through the EVF with my Sony with IS and long unstabilized lenses is pretty shaky. Results are good, however.

I shopped eBay and was surprised that used 100-300mm lens sell, on average, for about $440. It seemed a no brainer to buy one for $499 at Adorama. Just like renting, I suppose.

You'll like the lens, especially the "look" through the EVF at long zoom.

Not sure how the IBIS looks through the EVF, but the view through the EVF with my Sony with IS and long unstabilized lenses is pretty shaky.I shopped eBay and was surprised that used 100-300mm lens sell, on average, for about $440. It seemed a no brainer to buy one for $499 at Adorama.

When I tried it on the OM-D in the shop, the IBIS worked wonders with the 100-300mm. At 300mm it was steady as a rock.

As you say, second hand prices seem good. I can pick it up for ¥40,000 whereas buying new it would be around ¥56,000.

3. Panasonic 100-300mm 4.0-5.6 - all reviews and opinions indicate it's the best long lens. I also saw a second hand lens at a good price today.

As others mentioned the Oly 75-300 is a good option. Optically the equal and perhaps a little sharper - but also a little slower as far as aperture goes. Smaller and lighter. The new just released version is the same optics as the older one but now better priced and with better lens coatings.

But I'm a little unsure of the 100-300mm and wondering whether I should wait on this too, mainly because the lens is getting on for 3 years old so I wonder if there a strong likelihood of a new lens being released to supercede this, either a brighter lens to complete a Panasonic f2.8 trio, or maybe a comparable Olympus?

Usually lenses have a very long lifetime as products. If it was going to be replaced it would probably be a minor update like the Olympus 75-300 update which was mostly cosmetic. Bodies update about one a year, lenses usually take five years or longer.

Further to this, would a 100-300mm f2.8 lens be:

a) possible to make or

b) prohibitively heavy/large/expensive anyway?

The front element would have to be 110mm in diameter at a minimum. That is fairly gigantic even for a FF SLR lens.

Sigma makes a 120-300mm f/2.8. The size difference for SLR and mirrorless lenses of the same FL is small for long lenses, so I think that a µ4/3 100-300 f/2.8 would look similar.

The lens is 289.2 mm × 114.4 mm, and weighs almost 3 kg, or about 6.5 lbs. It sells on Amazon for $2700. You can see images of it in the review here.

I think that as we get to the point where µ4/3 can easily be the only system that an advanced photographer can own, such a tool would be welcome, even if it is not something that a lot of people would buy. But the Sigma lens does not have peers from Canon or Nikon, and I do not think that Olympus or Panasonic will be interested in creating such a niche lens.

Well, if it is a good lens, and people are buying it, chances are Panasonic will not be updating it any time soon! If Sigma or Tamron come out with a similar lens with better optics I would expect them to update it but not because it has been out there for 3 years. Look at some of the canon lenses such as the 100-400, it has been around for years.

I don't expect the 100-300mm lens to be revised. Sure, it is not perfect, but at the price, it performs quite well.

Very few M4/3 lenses have been revised so far, and only the volume kit lenses. That makes sense from an economic point of view. To revise the 100-300mm lens makes less sense, since it is a low volume, specialized lens.

Just bought my OM-D today, and am considering which lenses to add on. I currently only have the kit 12-50mm 3.5-6.3

My plan at the moment is to buy in the following order (when I have the cash)

1. Panasonic 35-100mm 2.8 - for longer shots and bright lens.

2. Panasonic 12-35mm 2.8 - brighter than the kit lens (but with rumours of an upcoming Olympus zoom with similar FL range I'm happy to hold off on this a while)

3. Panasonic 100-300mm 4.0-5.6 - all reviews and opinions indicate it's the best long lens. I also saw a second hand lens at a good price today.

But I'm a little unsure of the 100-300mm and wondering whether I should wait on this too, mainly because the lens is getting on for 3 years old so I wonder if there a strong likelihood of a new lens being released to supercede this, either a brighter lens to complete a Panasonic f2.8 trio, or maybe a comparable Olympus?

Further to this, would a 100-300mm f2.8 lens be:

a) possible to make or

b) prohibitively heavy/large/expensive anyway?

Thanks for your opinions.

What about the 75-300 II? OIS is not an issue for EM-5 really...

The original 75-300 was slower than 100-300, but has better IQ (and funnily enough, cost more)

100-300 f2.8 will be stupidly large and prohibitively expensive (The FT 150 f2 was priced £2000).

I think you're more likely to see the 100-300/4-5.6 stay as the slow long tele lens... (along with 75-300 / 75-300 II)

If you want fast glass, there will be a 150 f2.8 (likely to be pricey)

Would love a 100-300 f4 or even just a 300 f3.5 would do!Have you considered manual focus? Get some old OM / Nikkor stuff and use adaptor. Cheap way to get fast glass.